Improving Procedural Efficiency in Direct Peroral Cholangioscopy: A Retrospective Analysis of Intubation Time and Success Rates Across Five Techniques.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Wojciech Ciesielski, Tomasz Klimczak, Kacper Pawlak, Anna Sawina, Michał Kulig, Marta Cichończyk, Adam Durczyński, Janusz Strzelczyk, Piotr Hogendorf
{"title":"Improving Procedural Efficiency in Direct Peroral Cholangioscopy: A Retrospective Analysis of Intubation Time and Success Rates Across Five Techniques.","authors":"Wojciech Ciesielski, Tomasz Klimczak, Kacper Pawlak, Anna Sawina, Michał Kulig, Marta Cichończyk, Adam Durczyński, Janusz Strzelczyk, Piotr Hogendorf","doi":"10.1177/10926429251385767","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Background:</i></b> Direct peroral cholangioscopy (DPOC) offers enhanced visualization and therapeutic capabilities in biliary tract procedures. However, comparative data on intubation methods and procedural efficiency remain limited. This study aimed to evaluate the success rate, complication rate, and intubation time across five different biliary intubation techniques used in DPOC. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> This retrospective study analyzed 36 consecutive patients who underwent DPOC between December 2021 and March 2024. Indications included cholelithiasis, cholangiocarcinoma, proximal migration of biliary prostheses, and self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) occlusion. Five intubation methods were assessed: freehand, freehand with overtube, intraductal balloon, intraductal balloon with overtube, and intraductal balloon with overtube plus SEMS. Primary outcomes were technical success, intubation time, and complications. <b><i>Results:</i></b> All 36 procedures achieved successful biliary intubation (100% technical success) with no reported complications (0%). Mean intubation time differed significantly between methods (<i>P</i> < .001), with the shortest time observed in the intraductal balloon group (mean 73.3 seconds) and the longest in the freehand group (mean 202.25 seconds). No significant differences in intubation time were observed across clinical indications (<i>P</i> = .31). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> DPOC is a safe and effective procedure for various biliary pathologies, with accessory-assisted methods-particularly balloon-based techniques-demonstrating greater procedural efficiency. These findings support broader adoption of DPOC and tailored selection of intubation strategies based on anatomical and clinical context.</p>","PeriodicalId":50166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10926429251385767","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Direct peroral cholangioscopy (DPOC) offers enhanced visualization and therapeutic capabilities in biliary tract procedures. However, comparative data on intubation methods and procedural efficiency remain limited. This study aimed to evaluate the success rate, complication rate, and intubation time across five different biliary intubation techniques used in DPOC. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed 36 consecutive patients who underwent DPOC between December 2021 and March 2024. Indications included cholelithiasis, cholangiocarcinoma, proximal migration of biliary prostheses, and self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) occlusion. Five intubation methods were assessed: freehand, freehand with overtube, intraductal balloon, intraductal balloon with overtube, and intraductal balloon with overtube plus SEMS. Primary outcomes were technical success, intubation time, and complications. Results: All 36 procedures achieved successful biliary intubation (100% technical success) with no reported complications (0%). Mean intubation time differed significantly between methods (P < .001), with the shortest time observed in the intraductal balloon group (mean 73.3 seconds) and the longest in the freehand group (mean 202.25 seconds). No significant differences in intubation time were observed across clinical indications (P = .31). Conclusions: DPOC is a safe and effective procedure for various biliary pathologies, with accessory-assisted methods-particularly balloon-based techniques-demonstrating greater procedural efficiency. These findings support broader adoption of DPOC and tailored selection of intubation strategies based on anatomical and clinical context.

提高直接经口胆道镜检查的操作效率:五种技术插管时间和成功率的回顾性分析。
背景:直接经口胆道镜检查(DPOC)在胆道手术中提供了增强的可视化和治疗能力。然而,关于插管方法和程序效率的比较数据仍然有限。本研究旨在评估五种不同胆道插管技术在DPOC中的成功率、并发症发生率和插管时间。方法:本回顾性研究分析了2021年12月至2024年3月期间36例连续接受DPOC的患者。适应症包括胆石症、胆管癌、胆道假体近端移位和自膨胀金属支架(SEMS)闭塞。评估五种插管方法:徒手、徒手加管上插管、导管内球囊加管上插管、导管内球囊加管上插管、导管内球囊加管上插管加SEMS。主要结果为技术成功、插管时间和并发症。结果:36例胆道插管均成功(100%技术成功率),无并发症报告(0%)。两种方法平均插管时间差异有统计学意义(P < 0.001),管内球囊组最短(平均73.3秒),徒手组最长(平均202.25秒)。不同临床指征插管时间无显著差异(P = 0.31)。结论:DPOC是一种安全有效的治疗各种胆道疾病的方法,辅助辅助方法-特别是球囊技术-显示出更高的手术效率。这些发现支持更广泛地采用DPOC,并根据解剖和临床情况量身定制插管策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
163
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques (JLAST) is the leading international peer-reviewed journal for practicing surgeons who want to keep up with the latest thinking and advanced surgical technologies in laparoscopy, endoscopy, NOTES, and robotics. The Journal is ideally suited to surgeons who are early adopters of new technology and techniques. Recognizing that many new technologies and techniques have significant overlap with several surgical specialties, JLAST is the first journal to focus on these topics both in general and pediatric surgery, and includes other surgical subspecialties such as: urology, gynecologic surgery, thoracic surgery, and more.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信